50% roster turnover in 2 years

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from R3S1N20. Show R3S1N20's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    and your point is what.. BB knew we would have to get younger with the old guys getting older. and thats exactly what hes done so far, yes it may be taking a little longer than we would have liked but it going at a pretty good pace.. our rookies this year will mature and we'll have a pretty good team, but in 2011 we have 4, count em 4 picks in the first two rounds we will have a ton of new young tallen to mix with our not so old now veterans.. if belicheck can hit on even three of the picks from this year and next year we will be on our way to dominance again..
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years:
    and your point is what.. BB knew we would have to get younger with the old guys getting older. and thats exactly what hes done so far, yes it may be taking a little longer than we would have liked but it going at a pretty good pace.. our rookies this year will mature and we'll have a pretty good team, but in 2011 we have 4, count em 4 picks in the first two rounds we will have a ton of new young tallen to mix with our not so old now veterans.. if belicheck can hit on even three of the picks from this year and next year we will be on our way to dominance again..
    Posted by R3S1N20


    This is the reason. How many times in 05', 06', and 07' did we hear about the guys on D and O getting older and older. In 2 years we dropped our average age by 5 years, 5 YEARS!!! And we didn't just replace them with just anyone, Chung looks to develope into a Harrison (even Harrison said he's see's a lot of himself in Chung), Vollmer nough said, Butler looks like a great zone #2 CB, McKenzie and Tate still have high hopes of making impacts. You replaced your long snapper and punter 2 big positions on special teams, Ohrnberger showed promise and at worst will be a good backup, Bussey they are very excited about and I want to see why, Edelman looks like a Welker clone, McCourty is going to make an immediate impact replacing either W in nickle and also in the return game both as a gunner and runner, we just got one of the best all around TE's in the draft and another hybrid TE that can spread out to WR or be a short yrd H-Back, a big run stuffing ILB to play next to Mayo in Spikes, and another very strong backup in Pryor that could eventually take over the RDE.  Looking at the talent, character, and leadership in this past 2 draft classes it's no shock to me that there was a huge turn over compared to the players they replaced. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BTownExpress. Show BTownExpress's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    If one were to look at the Pats roster a few years, ago, one might have surely wanted to turn over 50% or more of the personnel.

    Let's face it, a lot of teams are getting nervous watching the Pats reload for the coming season, next year's draft, and the future.  Wilfork is signed; lots of backfield help coing.  Of course, TB should have a lot of new options to get back to that "lethal inside the zone" stage.  Nobody can deny tha fact that the Pats have improved quite a bit.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    Warranted- yes, Feasible- sort of.  I think massive roster turn over leads to inconsistent play due to inexperienced players and just getting used to working with the same guys as a team.  I would point out that the Jets have opted to do the same roster turnover, more by free agents but I think the results will be the same- inconsistent play.  We'll see how many starters change when the season begins, that will be the true indication.  IMHO Miami looks like the biggest threat in the division.

    On the positive it lets the Pats put together a team of mostly young talented players who will get familiar with each other and the system, but that will take a year or two more before they reach full development.  Another words they are putting together a SB roster but it won't be a SB team for another year or two.  I hope that they can put together a SB team this year but I think the outlook is brighter a year or two down the road.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RealtyPats. Show RealtyPats's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    BJESUS

    you said "pats fans" not we, so just curious what team are a fan of.  Pats fans are confident we WILL return to dominance.  We have the Krafts, BB and TB, obsouvisly we need more and are in the middle of a 2-3 year rebuilding that started last year and trying to stay competitive while doing so.  Maybe it will happen maybe not but yes WE DO feel very confident and should as we know how to do as we just did. 

    The reason we have the ability to trade pics so much and acquire so many for the future  and still usually use more pics every year than anyone else is because there are a lot MOST of the teams/GMs are under huge pressure to win so they mortgage their teams pics on guys that will have an immediate impact at the expense of  using 2 draft pics sometimes 3 usually in the following years draft which has less value for one player.  Problem is you put all your eggs in one or just a few baskets and they don't work out your FU@Ked.  See chicago, jets....

    I have no problem with you coming here and ripping our team it's an open forum but at least tell us who your team is so we can understand where your coming from.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ItsPat. Show ItsPat's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years:
    But I digress.  Point is, how bad is a team that you need to replace more than 1/2 the roster in two years and how does that happen in the first place?
    Posted by bjesuss


    Lets look at all the turn over with the starters of the Pats
    QB - Brady 10 years, Lots of back up turnover
    WR - Moss, Welker vets - Edelman, Slater, Tate and Rookie Price new blood
    O Line - Starters Light 01, Mankins 05, Koppen 03, Neal 01, Kaczur 05 - new blood with Vollmer, Bussey, Ohrnberger and new draft picks today.
    TE - All new blood
    RB - Maroney 06, Faulk 99, with vets Morris and Taylor
    D line - Warren 03, Wilfork 04, Wright 05 - new blood Pryor, Brace, vet Lewis and new draft picks
    LB - This is one area where most guys are new over the past 3 years
    CB - Another area where everyone is new over the past 3 years except Sanders 05. 

    So, you point was?  Looks to me like the majority of the starters did not see a 50% turnover.  Three positions have seen heavy turnover, TE (hopefully address in draft).
    LB - Mayo (Stud), Thomas (not lived up to contract), and with two new draft picks to compete with Guyton, Banta-Cain, Woods, McKenzie and Crable this unit appears to be on it's way up.
    CB - Another unit that has seen almost everyone new but with Bodden on one side and McCourty, Butler, Wilhite, Wheatley battling for the other side we only need one of the 4 to become a quality starter and this will be a good unit.
    Safety - Heavy turnover but Meriweather is a player and with Chung in his second year and Sanders playing free safety this position seems set.

    So my point is?  YOU KNOW NOTHING!  There are 22 starters so if the Pats add added say 25 new guys over the past two years these guys are backups with many being groomed to become starters.  Sounds like a great plan to me!  Oh, with all these rookies/draft picks on the roster we have enough money to resign Brady, Bodden and Wilfork.  Good way to keep the key guys.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    TO THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS POST-  you saying this is tom brady's team exposes your ignorance.  Tom did not win the superbowl in any given year.  Tom did his job, and did it well.  SO DID TEDY BRUSCHI, VRABLE, MCGINEST, JOHNSON, LAW MILLOY, WARREN, TRAYLOR, BRANCH, ANDRUZZI, BROWN, COMPTON, DILLON, SMITH, HARRISON, BUCKLEY, AND I COULD GO ON AND ON AND ON AND ON. The one year Brady was phenomenal, we LOST the superbowl because one guy (SAMUEL) didn't do his frickin job.  SO DON"T GIVE ME THAT TOM BRADY OWNS THIS TEAM.  He is a very good quarterback who knows his job and his place.  It is the total sum of the parts, acting under the direction of the Head Coach, that gets the job done.  Last few years we were a few parts short.  So we are getting some more parts.  Go worship fat rex AFTER he wins something tangible.  Last time i checked, the ONLY championship Tshirts a team in our division won were the AFC EAST CHAMPION PATRIOTS.  And who hoisted the Lombardi?  NOT THE JETS.  Say what you will, they are an 8-8 team in reality. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from rocher. Show rocher's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    Advancing in the playoffs is more important than winning the division. Winning the division only gets you in, and possibly home feild advantage. Maybe your priorities are different.
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsGhost. Show RedsGhost's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years:
    Who are you? Doctor Evil?  Make sure you include your evil laugh when you promise your return to dominance. Point is mass roster turnover is not good for a team hoping to compete.  Of course, Pats fans love to talk about the financial benefits of lower round picks and the Pats have become known for not paying players, so it'll be tough to fit those 4 picks in.  I suspect a couple will be traded for 15 or 20 5th-7th round picks, that's where the value is.  By the time this all comes to be, Brady will be hanging them up.   
    Posted by bjesuss


    I gotta ask....are you a troll? I only ask cause Trolls keep resurfacing with the myth that the Pat's are cheap or in your words "have become known for not paying players". Did you actually drink the anti-Patriot koolaid and keep spewing this garbage? EVERY year they spend up to the max., they CAN'T spend anymore.
    As for those that are expecting turnover to "just happen", get a clue. You can't turn over a roster in a month. Thinking 3 years to get younger is tremendous ( last year, this  and next ).
    It won't be tough to fit in next years 4 draft picks with a rookie wage scale now will it?
    Despise Troll thinking.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    Players, like employees, retire. I am certain that any NFL team is far more competitive than just about any company (Goldman Sachs excepted) and there is a large amount of turnover with every team. If you have success most teams will try to pry away players for more dinero and you have a cap to deal with (you know that cap that we extend Brady with by saving from hard rookie cap in 2011). This all pretty easy to decipher.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from newenglanderinexile. Show newenglanderinexile's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    Since the average career of NFL players is less than four years, it is not surprising that the Patriots have experienced a 50% plus turnover in two years.  That is par for the course, and true for every other NFL team.    
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from hayley-1999. Show hayley-1999's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    The big bad Jets! This was a team that was "gifted " wins in their last two regular season games which makes them  a 7-9 team, just like Miami and out of the playoffs. I could make the argument that the Pats with a well oiled/ conditioned Tom Brady should have been 13-3 if the ball bounces their way a couple three games. This isn't the 16-0 "08' Patriots! The team lost half it's defense since then.  After this weekends draft I'd take this team into battle against any one because of two people . Bill Belichick and Tom Brady! Hey guys we had a great ,great draft. Too many of you fan's are spoiled with this teams success. It's great to watch a team put together a champion. So relax sit back and watch the show! I think that these guys have got a couple of Superbowls left in them.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wendylee03. Show Wendylee03's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years:
    If one were to look at the Pats roster a few years, ago, one might have surely wanted to turn over 50% or more of the personnel. Let's face it, a lot of teams are getting nervous watching the Pats reload for the coming season, next year's draft, and the future.  Wilfork is signed; lots of backfield help coing.  Of course, TB should have a lot of new options to get back to that "lethal inside the zone" stage.  Nobody can deny tha fact that the Pats have improved quite a bit.
    Posted by BTownExpress

    Not sure where your getting your information from but everything that Ive read there is NO one getting nervous about what the Patriots have done. But I have read much about everyone being nervous what the Jets and Miami have done, including Vince W who said the Jets are getting stacked!  Your putting a great deal of hope in the so called backfield into a rookie dont you think?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wendylee03. Show Wendylee03's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years:
    TO THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS POST-  you saying this is tom brady's team exposes your ignorance.  Tom did not win the superbowl in any given year.  Tom did his job, and did it well.  SO DID TEDY BRUSCHI, VRABLE, MCGINEST, JOHNSON, LAW MILLOY, WARREN, TRAYLOR, BRANCH, ANDRUZZI, BROWN, COMPTON, DILLON, SMITH, HARRISON, BUCKLEY, AND I COULD GO ON AND ON AND ON AND ON. The one year Brady was phenomenal, we LOST the superbowl because one guy (SAMUEL) didn't do his frickin job.  SO DON"T GIVE ME THAT TOM BRADY OWNS THIS TEAM.  He is a very good quarterback who knows his job and his place.  It is the total sum of the parts, acting under the direction of the Head Coach, that gets the job done.  Last few years we were a few parts short.  So we are getting some more parts.  Go worship fat rex AFTER he wins something tangible.  Last time i checked, the ONLY championship Tshirts a team in our division won were the AFC EAST CHAMPION PATRIOTS.  And who hoisted the Lombardi?  NOT THE JETS.  Say what you will, they are an 8-8 team in reality. 
    Posted by Davedsone

    You hit that nail right on the head. Those Super Bowls could have been lost if it had not been for Adam V. Tom Brady is good but he is not the entire team. And lets be clear, since superstar Randy Moss has been to town there are no Super Bowl rings. It takes a TEAM not just one player.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from hayley-1999. Show hayley-1999's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years:
    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years : By your post, it seems that 1999 is your year of birth and that the MA schools have failed the children of the taxpayers.  So you want to disregard a 31-0 thrashing of the Bengals (the week before beating them in the playoffs) becasue their starters didn't play the 4th quarter? But Tom Brady 'Should have been" 13-3 if only TB had played better.  The Jets lost 5 games by a total of 17 points, should they have been 14-2? Of course not, moron, you are what your record says you are. 
    Posted by bjesuss

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from hayley-1999. Show hayley-1999's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years:
    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years : By your post, it seems that 1999 is your year of birth and that the MA schools have failed the children of the taxpayers.  So you want to disregard a 31-0 thrashing of the Bengals (the week before beating them in the playoffs) becasue their starters didn't play the 4th quarter? But Tom Brady 'Should have been" 13-3 if only TB had played better.  The Jets lost 5 games by a total of 17 points, should they have been 14-2? Of course not, moron, you are what your record says you are. 
    Posted by bjesuss

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from hayley-1999. Show hayley-1999's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    You must be a jets fan!  Hayley 1999 is my daughter's birthday and I'f you want to call someone a moron look in a mirror!  It was my understanding that the Bengals were only inerested in not getting anyone hurt in that game but no matter. You did get a pass in the Colts game which makes you no more than 8-8 and out of the play-offs and as far as the rest of your post is concerned, we'll settle it on the field this fall. Sorry you needed to personalize , guess it shows your level of maturity!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mungomunro. Show Mungomunro's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

       If NE was a bad team we would have lots of high draft pick every year and we could stock our line up with instant starters. ( Like the Jets and Dolphins do every year)

      Because we win every year we rarely have a pick in the first 25.

      BB tries to make up for NE's lack of high picks by collecting lots of picks in the hope that one of more of them will turn out to be realy good players.

      It isn't critical that BB  finds a stud with every low pick is is only important for him to find enough talant to keep NE winning.

     So far he has done that with careful player development.

    Rotating players to keep them healthy longer thus extending the carrers of the talant we already have.

    Making NE a popular spot for free agants to play.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from croc. Show croc's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    Pretty obvious 12 usually aren't expected to make it around that long, particularly the last 6 or 7.  The other striking thing is they are getting more physical this time.  Yes the Pats are in transition they know they should be to sustain the success.

    The Jets OTOH are putting a lot of eggs in the FA basket with only a few picks.  Even though they have some good young talent the bulk of the team is vets.  Several of the better younger players are coming up for contracts soon too.  This is not a group that will easily sustain any sucess they have.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from hayley-1999. Show hayley-1999's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years:
    Seriously? Didn't want to get hurt?  So you lose 31-0?  That's about as smart as the Pats should have been 13-3 comment.  Can I assume that your daughter schooled you on how not to post blanks?
    Posted by bjesuss

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from hayley-1999. Show hayley-1999's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    You show alot of class bringing someone's daughter into an on line Post! What do you think this is Jets Fan , the N.Y. Post?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from croc. Show croc's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    Hayley he's trying to be the master baiter and succeeding in something that like that - perhaps.

    btw the edit post key can take away a lost of mistakes ;)
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from hayley-1999. Show hayley-1999's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    In Response to Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years:
    Hayley he's trying to be the master baiter and succeeding in something that like that - perhaps. btw the edit post key can take away a lost of mistakes ;)
    Posted by croc

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from hayley-1999. Show hayley-1999's posts

    Re: 50% roster turnover in 2 years

    Thank you !
     

Share